Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Search
Forums » Memoir '44 - English » Questions
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
Sgt Storm
Senior Member
Lieutenant

User Pages
Posts: 892
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Questions Wed, 11 December 2013 19:49
I'll try to answer these, though I don't have the campaign book with me.

Just a note, and no offense, but you need to be more patient. Also not so quick to clutter up the campaign FAQ sticky thread with questionable question (again no offense). Many of the questions you post are easily determined by a careful reading of the rules (all but one actually) and the other (Heavy tanks) is found by a search of the keyword "heavy tank" as I asked that question a couple years ago.

Rork wrote on Sat, 07 December 2013 10:29

Having now finished the Polish campaign and the Fall Geld grand campaign, I'm back with some questions.

Unternehmen Fall Geld campaign
Heavy Tank Track: the rule mentions "enemy heavy tank units" and "Allied armor unit".
1. The Crossing of the Meuse campaign has an "armor unit [that] represents an AMD Panhard-178 unit (armored cars)" in the Combats in Stonne scenario. The grand campaign ends with the Dunkirk scenario which features a British tank unit. Do these units count on the Heavy Tank Track (armored car is not an enemy tank, but it is an armor unit; the Armor Track specifically points out to French tanks)?



Heavy Tanks are allied if I remember correctly. If they appear on the allied page, then they are allied. Heavy tanks are elite armor units. There should only be heavy tank tracks in campaigns that have elite armor.

Quote:

2. The Panzer/Heavy Tank tracks show up in three out of four campaigns: do destroyed armor units add up on said tracks for the entire grand campaign or do they only count for each campaign only?


Tank tracks are essentially objectives. In grand campaign you sum the points from the individual campaigns, do you not? So, the answer should be self-explanatory. Just add the points of each individual campaign.

Quote:

Does the Position Control rule still applies to the following situation?
Tank unit close assaults and eliminates enemy unit (which should count as final victory medal, but discards it), makes an Armor Overrun action, close assaults and eliminates a second enemy unit (which again should count as final victory medal, but again discards it) stationed on a Temporary Medal Objective, Takes Ground as a final action and claims the objective medal thereby ending the game.


That question is answered by a reading of the rules as noted above.

Quote:

And before moving on to Barbarossa, I need some clarifications.

1. Victory Events Rolls are cumulative between the three campaign and the two phases, correct?
Example 1: Axis player starts in Barbarossa Center, wins two battles, moves to South, wins first battle; prior to playing the second center scenario, he rolls 2 + 3 = 5 dice.
Example 2: Having finished the first phase with 4 wins and two losses, Axis player rolls at the start of the second phase 2 + 4 = 6 dice, while Allied player rols 2 + 2 = 4 dice.




Each of the three campaigns are separate campaigns. Treat them as such and apply the rules. The victory event rolls are separate for each campaign.

Quote:

2. There are three scenarios (Bug River, Smolensk and Russian Breakout) where the Axis player must win by a difference of 2/3 more medals, otherwise the Allied player wins. If the Axis player wins by a minimal margin, does this means that the medals still counts on the campaign sheet, but the campaign moves to the next scenario as if the Allied player won the scenario instead?


Not sure what you mean as your wording is ambiguous. Axis can't "win" unless it meets the win criteria as described in the scenario rules, which as you say, by a certain margin. So if they "win" by those rules then they win, otherwise they lose.
The medals count on the campaign sheet.

Quote:

As a final note, is the Russian grand campaign supposed to become more and more punishing for the Germans even if they win all the scenarios?


Not sure what you mean by more punishing? Are you saying the scenarios get harder to win? The campaign is what it is.

[Updated on: Wed, 11 December 2013 19:53]

      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7099
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Questions Wed, 11 December 2013 21:54
Sgt Storm wrote on Wed, 11 December 2013 22:49

I'll try to answer these, though I don't have the campaign book with me.

Just a note, and no offense, but you need to be more patient. Also not so quick to clutter up the campaign FAQ sticky thread with questionable question (again no offense). Many of the questions you post are easily determined by a careful reading of the rules (all but one actually) and the other (Heavy tanks) is found by a search of the keyword "heavy tank" as I asked that question a couple years ago.


To be fair, I told Rork to post his outstanding questions in the Campaign Book FAQ. I should have clarified a little more, I'm afraid.

If questions don't get answers because nobody seems to know, or there is confusion/disagreement, the outstanding questions (that need official answers) should be posted in the Campaign FAQ thread so they don't get lost in time. General questions that can be and are answered by players don't belong in the FAQ thread because otherwise it gets too crowded. In this case, it looks like most of these questions can be answered from the rules as written, or by searching through the forums using "Key Word Search" features.

Don't worry at this point about cluttering the thread since they are already posted, but future questions that can't be answered should make their way to the Campaign FAQ.

I hope this makes more sense. Cool
      
Sgt Storm
Senior Member
Lieutenant

User Pages
Posts: 892
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Questions Wed, 11 December 2013 23:38
Sorry, I didn't mean to be harsh. Embarassed Sure enough, Rork shouldn't worry about those posts and Rork should feel welcome to ask questions.

Its worth mentioning that the usual approach to questions is to discuss them pretty thoroughly in a separate thread (such as this one) and then when an impasse is reached or consensus reached that an answer is pretty much not going to come from the community, then to post in the FAQ thread.

When I ask questions and they get lost, I bump the thread a bit, repeating any questions that haven't been answered. At that point, it might help to focus on one question at a time until they are answered as they can get lost in a big list of questions.

But anyway, its no big deal.
      
Rork
Member

User Pages
Posts: 55
Registered:
November 2006
Re:Questions Wed, 11 December 2013 23:49
Sgt Storm wrote on Wed, 11 December 2013 20:49

(...) (Heavy tanks) is found by a search of the keyword "heavy tank" as I asked that question a couple years ago. (...)
Heavy Tanks are allied if I remember correctly. If they appear on the allied page, then they are allied. Heavy tanks are elite armor units. There should only be heavy tank tracks in campaigns that have elite armor.

Found the thread, you are correct and I stand corrected Laughing : it just never occured to me to search for those specific terms Embarassed . Of course it answers my question, but...
There is absolutely no mention nowhere in the rules of "elite tank units". How is a player supposed to find out this "tiny" detail? O, wait, maybe by a careful reading of the rules in search of something that was never there in the first place Shocked .
And wait, there's another problem here. If the Axis player wins all the battles in Crossing of the Meuse campaign, he may destroy a grand total of 3 elite tank units: 1 from Combats in Stonne scenario + 2 from some really lucky Allied reserve rolls. So why then is there a Heavy units destroyed track with an impossible to reach 4+ tanks/3 points?!? Which kinda brings us to the next question.

Sgt Storm wrote on Wed, 11 December 2013 20:49

Quote:

2. The Panzer/Heavy Tank tracks show up in three out of four campaigns: do destroyed armor units add up on said tracks for the entire grand campaign or do they only count for each campaign only?

Tank tracks are essentially objectives. In grand campaign you sum the points from the individual campaigns, do you not? So, the answer should be self-explanatory. Just add the points of each individual campaign.

There's a misunderstanding here: I'm talking about armor units destroyed, not about points earned on the track. I'll try to explain with an example from the Allies' side.
Say the Allied player destroys in The Diversion part of the Grand Campaign 4 german tank units (0 points on the track), then the game moves to The Sickle-Cut, where he destroys 1 more in the first scenario (again 0 points). But at this point, the Allied player has a total of 5 tank units destroyed (4 in Diversion, 1 in Sickle-Cut) so he should have 1 point on the track - yes or no? Or, in other words, does the Panzer units destroyed track resets itself during a grand campaign?
Incidentally, an "Yes" answer here would justify the otherwise impossible to achieve 4+ Heavy units destroyed in the Meuse campaign: you can only do this if you play a grand campaign where destroyed elite armor adds up on said track from campaign to campaign.

Sgt Storm wrote on Wed, 11 December 2013 20:49

Quote:

Victory Events Rolls are cumulative between the three campaign and the two phases, correct?

Each of the three campaigns are separate campaigns. Treat them as such and apply the rules. The victory event rolls are separate for each campaign.

Is this an official ruling?!?
Because logic dictates that they can't be treated as such since during a grand campaign they're intertwined and with Reserve Tokens put together, presumably to "simulate" the vast movements of troops, logistic problems and command decisions on the Eastern front. And why would the Axis player choose where to fight only to be stuck with the same decision as if he was playing the campaign straight from start to finish?

Sgt Storm wrote on Wed, 11 December 2013 20:49

Not sure what you mean as your wording is ambiguous. Axis can't "win" unless it meets the win criteria as described in the scenario rules, which as you say, by a certain margin. So if they "win" by those rules then they win, otherwise they lose.
The medals count on the campaign sheet.

Right, my mistake. Let's try again.
In Barbarossa Center, the Axis player "wins" Bug River 5-4, but since he failed the special rule for this scenario (win by 3 or more medals), the Allied player is the real winner and the campaign moves to Pruzana, not to Smolensk - yes or no?

Sgt Storm wrote on Wed, 11 December 2013 20:49

Not sure what you mean by more punishing? Are you saying the scenarios get harder to win? The campaign is what it is.


Um, not quite: I'm saying that most of the indications for the next scenario are penalties for the Axis even in the case of a previous win. The only exceptions to this are Smolensk in the Center and Luga Bridges in the North - that's two out of 8 scenarios (if all wins). So yea, it seems the idea is that the better the Axis player performs, the worse things get. Is this by design?
I understand if it were so, but then why would there be rewards if the Axis accumulates losses, as most of the good stuff comes only if losing previous scenario?

[Updated on: Thu, 12 December 2013 20:32]

      
Rork
Member

User Pages
Posts: 55
Registered:
November 2006
Re:Questions Wed, 11 December 2013 23:55
Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 00:38

Its worth mentioning that the usual approach to questions is to discuss them pretty thoroughly in a separate thread (such as this one) and then when an impasse is reached or consensus reached that an answer is pretty much not going to come from the community, then to post in the FAQ thread.

Yup, completely agree and that is what I tried to do in the first place.

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 00:38

When I ask questions and they get lost, I bump the thread a bit, repeating any questions that haven't been answered.

Hmmmph - no one called you yet impatient Razz ? Just kiddin', of course;).
Anyway, that's what I intend to do with the Dunkirk questions Cool .

So what now, should I erase the CB1 errata thread posts now, since the answers will be provided here?


[Updated on: Thu, 12 December 2013 00:01]

      
Sgt Storm
Senior Member
Lieutenant

User Pages
Posts: 892
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Questions Thu, 12 December 2013 20:18
I don't know how else to answer the questions I thought I answered above.

Just read the rules as they are. Don't apply arguments why they should be different or why they aren't logical. I played all these scenarios and didn't have the problems with the rules you seem to be having (except to clarify that Heavy Tanks = elite tanks) so the answers seem obvious to me. Sorry.

I don't have the campaign book with me so can't answer about the Heavy Tanks. It should be obvious. If the track is in the campaign then that is where it applies. If the track is instead on the grand campaign rules page then that is where it applies.

Things don't carry over between campaigns unless there is a rule stating they do.

Quote:

So yea, it seems the idea is that the better the Axis player performs, the worse things get. Is this by design?


Here's an example of you reading too much into it. The entire campaign is by design. If its in the rules then its by design. That's why I say "it is what it is". (Except of course where there are errors Laughing )

[Updated on: Thu, 12 December 2013 20:23]

      
rasmussen81
DoW Content Provider
Designer's Oath

User Pages
Posts: 7099
Registered:
July 2007
Re:Questions Thu, 12 December 2013 20:26
Rork wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 02:55

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 00:38

Its worth mentioning that the usual approach to questions is to discuss them pretty thoroughly in a separate thread (such as this one) and then when an impasse is reached or consensus reached that an answer is pretty much not going to come from the community, then to post in the FAQ thread.

Yup, completely agree and that is what I tried to do in the first place.

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 00:38

When I ask questions and they get lost, I bump the thread a bit, repeating any questions that haven't been answered.

Hmmmph - no one called you yet impatient Razz ? Just kiddin', of course;).
Anyway, that's what I intend to do with the Dunkirk questions Cool .

So what now, should I erase the CB1 errata thread posts now, since the answers will be provided here?


The CB1 errata thread is reserved for questions that don't get answers, and that need official help or need to be included in the CB1 Official FAQ some day. Since these questions have already been answered here, you could erase the post you have in the CB1 errata thread or just make a note saying that all of the questions were answered already by someone else.

That way, when someone is going through the thread in the future they'll know that your questions were covered and don't need to be in the FAQ document. Let me know if this doesn't make sense for any reason. Smile
      
Rork
Member

User Pages
Posts: 55
Registered:
November 2006
Re:Questions Thu, 12 December 2013 20:55
Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:18

I don't know how else to answer the questions I thought I answered above.

And I don't know how to state them any simpler than a YES/NO answer. Thank you for the answers as they were, though.

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:18

If the track is in the campaign then that is where it applies. If the track is instead on the grand campaign rules page then that is where it applies.

The track is in the campaign. The track is also on the grand campaign rules.
That being said, why is there a track on the Meuse campaign with an impossible-to-achieve objective? Because if this isn't an error, then I don't know what it is.

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:18

Quote:

So yea, it seems the idea is that the better the Axis player performs, the worse things get. Is this by design?


Here's an example of you reading too much into it. The entire campaign is by design. If its in the rules then its by design. That's why I say "it is what it is". (Except of course where there are errors Laughing )

OK, I'd like to know if this was a possible print error, with scenario-winning events being switched with those related to losses.
      
Rork
Member

User Pages
Posts: 55
Registered:
November 2006
Re:Questions Thu, 12 December 2013 20:58
rasmussen81 wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:26

The CB1 errata thread is reserved for questions that don't get answers, and that need official help or need to be included in the CB1 Official FAQ some day. Since these questions have already been answered here, you could erase the post you have in the CB1 errata thread or just make a note saying that all of the questions were answered already by someone else.

That way, when someone is going through the thread in the future they'll know that your questions were covered and don't need to be in the FAQ document. Let me know if this doesn't make sense for any reason. Smile

It makes perfect sense. I'll do that as soon as the Meuse Heavy tank track question is settled. Which will leave only the Dunkirk questions, for which there's no answer yet.
      
Sgt Storm
Senior Member
Lieutenant

User Pages
Posts: 892
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Questions Thu, 12 December 2013 23:21
Rork wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 14:55

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:18

I don't know how else to answer the questions I thought I answered above.

And I don't know how to state them any simpler than a YES/NO answer. Thank you for the answers as they were, though.

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:18

If the track is in the campaign then that is where it applies. If the track is instead on the grand campaign rules page then that is where it applies.

The track is in the campaign. The track is also on the grand campaign rules.
That being said, why is there a track on the Meuse campaign with an impossible-to-achieve objective? Because if this isn't an error, then I don't know what it is.

Sgt Storm wrote on Thu, 12 December 2013 21:18

Quote:

So yea, it seems the idea is that the better the Axis player performs, the worse things get. Is this by design?


Here's an example of you reading too much into it. The entire campaign is by design. If its in the rules then its by design. That's why I say "it is what it is". (Except of course where there are errors Laughing )

OK, I'd like to know if this was a possible print error, with scenario-winning events being switched with those related to losses.


The track IS NOT on the grand campaign rules (page 47). The Heavy Tank track is only in The Sickle Cut (page 61) and hence only applies to the Sickle Cut campaign. There are 4 HT units in this campaign with the possibility of more via reserve rolls. There is a HT track in The Crossing of the Meuse (page 68) and this applies only to this campaign. There are 4, correction 5, HT units in this campaign as well, but depending on the track taken either 1 or 4 are available. It took me 1 minute to check this. Rolling Eyes Anyway, again, things do not roll over from campaigns in a Grand Campaign unless specifically noted on the grand campaign rules page (page 47 in this case).

The tough consequences for winning are NOT print errors in the Barbarossa campaign tracks. They are there to balance the scenario. Just read the red text above the consequences and you will see that they make perfect sense (e.g., snow fall and soviets bringing reinforcements from Siberia before playing Gates of Moscow means Allies get 3 die on reserve roll etc.) Again, something easily checked. Cool


[Updated on: Thu, 12 December 2013 23:33]

      
Rork
Member

User Pages
Posts: 55
Registered:
November 2006
Re:Questions Fri, 13 December 2013 07:42
Sgt Storm wrote on Fri, 13 December 2013 00:21

The track IS NOT on the grand campaign rules (page 47). (...) Anyway, again, things do not roll over from campaigns in a Grand Campaign unless specifically noted on the grand campaign rules page (page 47 in this case).

Now I see what you mean: you were refering to the titles of the pages, "Campaign Notes" and "Grand Campaign Rules". I didn't give it a second thought because all the rules from "Campaign Notes" also apply to the grand campaign (opposite being not true), so the distinction is irrelevant (at least in this case).
Still, the fact remains that one path of the Meuse campaign offers an impossible-to-achieve objective. But hey, it doesn't matter anymore, since players are supposed to guess this refers to Elite tank units Twisted Evil .

Sgt Storm wrote on Fri, 13 December 2013 00:21

The tough consequences for winning are NOT print errors in the Barbarossa campaign tracks.

Thank you, that was all the answer I needed on this.

And thank you again for the rest of the answers as well. Would you maybe also like to tackle the Dunkirk ones, since apparently no one else does? Very Happy

[Updated on: Fri, 13 December 2013 07:48]

      
Pages (2): [ «  <  1  2 ]     
Previous Topic:Operation Compass
Next Topic:Italian Cavalry
Goto Forum: